I still don’t see the problem with Vista. It works great for me.
It’s fast, easy to use and runs everything I want it to.
For the record, I am running a Lenovo 3000 N100 laptop with 2 1.8 gig duel core and 2 gig of memory.
Running equipment made for Vista does help!
“Running equipment made for Vista does help!”
That is correct, but people are getting tired of having to upgrade every 1,2 or 3 years. Even Mac people normally go 5 years in between hardware upgrades. Businesses really hate upgraing that often, especially when current or even past workstations did everything they needed. Only reason to upgrade is due to MS coming out with a hog of new OS. The need for more horsepower is not application driven. The only time a new verison of OS needs to come out is when there becomes to many Service Packs to download for new installs or something other Earth shattering change in design.
Yeah - I don't understand the beef with Vista, either.
They did some dumb things, like moving
C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Start Menuto
C:\programdata\microsoft\windows\start menuAnd moving
C:\Documents and Settings\%USERNAME%\Start Menuto
C:\Users\%USERNAME%\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Start MenuWhich means that it takes maybe a day or so to figure out what's going on.
But once you get over a few glitches like that, it seems to work great for me.
You even get the choice of five or six different Look-n-Feel's to the desktop - Vista Aero, Vista, XP, Classic [Windows 2000], and I think maybe even Win98/Win95.
I went with just plain "Vista" - Aero was a little too snazzy for me, but it works just fine if I were to want to use it.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^I still don’t see the problem with Vista. It works great for me.^^^^^^^^^^^^
And
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^For the record, I am running a Lenovo 3000 N100 laptop with 2 1.8 gig duel core and 2 gig of memory.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That’s why it’s fast. “Made for Vista” hardware is required because the OS is just way too bloated.
Put Michael Moore’s fat arse into a maserati and the car is still fast! LOL